Developing non-native postgraduate students' academic writing skills in English using Google Docs
Research on academic writing has suggested the use of dialogic feedback, however little is known about its effects and the ways it can be offered. Therefore, this research attempted to develop the skills of writing and revising the literature review genre among four non-native postgraduate students...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/78516/1/SamiraYadollahiKakhPFP2014.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Research on academic writing has suggested the use of dialogic feedback, however little is known about its effects and the ways it can be offered. Therefore, this research attempted to develop the skills of writing and revising the literature review genre among four non-native postgraduate students of Civil Engineering by offering dialogic feedback in Google Docs (GD) environment. The objectives of the study were to investigate: i) learners’ experiences, ii) the effects of dialogic feedback on learners’ subsequent drafts, and iii) the influence of interactions in GD on the learners’ writing behavior. To meet these objectives, the learners were asked to i) study some reading materials on how to write the literature review, ii) review some journal articles, and iii) draft their literature reviews in GD. Then, a writing emoderator together with a subject e-moderator provided dialogic feedback for each of the learners in the form of synchronous and asynchronous interaction in GD. Virtual participant observation, focus group interviews, learners’ journal entries, interactions, learners’ drafts, and the subject e-moderator’s reflections were sources of data. Results of the study showed firstly, dialogic feedback through GD provided timely support and guidance for the learners, stimulated learning from comparison and discussion, engaged the learners in revising, and developed a sense of readership in them. Secondly, dialogic feedback led to better revisions by drawing outlines, constructing topic sentences, developing cohesion and coherence, and constructing scientific arguments. Thirdly, the interactions in GD enhanced the learners’ selfregulatory behavior in discovering genre features by developing better understanding of the revising stage, summarizing, and paraphrasing techniques. This study suggests that using dialogic feedback in GD improved the quality of the learners’ drafts written in their disciplines. Moreover, GD could facilitate successfully timely and referable written dialogic feedback. Such breakthroughs have introduced a new dimension in academic writing pedagogy. |
|---|